Ferguson murder began by victim walking in gutter? Wo!

southernbubby

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:15 am

glutenless wrote:

I think a big factor in this discussion, and any discussion that people are having about this case, is that we are not fearing for our life. It's very easy to check your prejudice at the door when you're sitting at your computer or on a jury. It's a little different when someone is in your face, grabbing for your gun. It's very easy to fairly judge a black kid who is being respectful and polite. A little harder when he's menacing you. On the other hand, we are not trained police officers who should be able handle such a situation.
My gut reaction is that probably neither one was right. If Brown would have cooperated he would be alive, and if Wilson would have stopped shooting, if it's true that Brown really was running away, then he would also be alive. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be too many credible witnesses, so we don't know if he was still charging at Wilson, or running away.

Shouldn't police officers be trained in protocol so that needless deaths don't occur?

marina

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:23 am

DrMom wrote:

...and I didn't charge your car and try to grab your gun...

Did you read the article and see the video I posted about white guys who don't get killed by cops? Statistics also support this

southernbubby

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:23 am

marina wrote:

To Bubby: I know. I'm just saying that I wouldn't use that situation to worry about bias.

Ok, but let's ask this question. Does bias work both ways? For example can blacks be biased against another group such as Jews and use that bias in a way that is unfair or hurtful?

Barbara

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:24 am

DrMom wrote:

...and I didn't charge your car and try to grab your gun...

You do know that's not when Michael Brown was killed, don't you?

He was killed when he was a distance away from Wilson, taking a couple of steps or stumbling forward a bit, in what at least 6 witnesses testified was an attempt to surrender. Virtually every witness saw Brown’s hands raised in some fashion.

But if you surrender here, I'm pretty sure that Marina will promise not to shoot at you a dozen times, or to hit you six times.

mommy3b2c

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:25 am

southernbubby wrote:

If the officer shot in self-defense, it would seem that he no longer needed self-defense if the suspect ran away.

The suspect attacked him and ran away, he ran after the suspect, the suspect turned and charged him, he told the suspect to stop, the suspect continued charging him, he shot the suspect

mommy3b2c

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:26 am

marina wrote:

Because it's immoral to kill someone who isn't posing a mortal danger to you. Even Halacha recognizes this.

He killed him because he felt he was in mortal danger.

southernbubby

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:27 am

mommy2b2c wrote:

The suspect attacked him and ran away, he ran after the suspect, the suspect turned and charged him, he told the suspect to stop, the suspect continued charging him, he shot the suspect

When a cop is pursuing a vehicle there are protocols for high speed chases because they are dangerous. Would the same protocol apply on foot?

mommy3b2c

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:33 am

marina wrote:

I don't recall your take on it specifically, but the vast majority of imamothers insisting he was punished harshly because he was a Jew etc

Here few people seem to think that this death ( a pretty harsh result, no?) was a result of racism. They insist that this death was the victim's fault and that the police did nothing wrong. I'm pointing out the double standard.

Why is it a double standard? Maybe that's what they actually believe. I, for example, believe that although rubashkin may have been guilty of a crime, his punishment was a gross abuse of our justice system and was overly harsh. Many who know a lot more about our justice system and about his case specifically agree with me.

I also believe that Michael brown was killed because he assaulted a cop and not because he was black.

I also believe that many times blacks get harsher sentences then whites for the same crimes and that is wrong.

Which of these statements contradict each other or are double standards?

Barbara

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:33 am

mommy2b2c wrote:

The suspect attacked him and ran away, he ran after the suspect, the suspect turned and charged him, he told the suspect to stop, the suspect continued charging him, he shot the suspect

WERE YOU THERE?

If you were, you can say that.

But unless you were there, your decision to completely ignore the half dozen or more witnesses who said THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN is cherry picking evidence.

But please, explain to me. ALMOST EVERY PERSON who saw Wilson said his hands were in the air. Some had different interpretations of the gesture. But all said in the air. Clearly Brown couldn't shoot with his hands in the air, especially since there was no gun. So why was Wilson in fear of being killed? Wilson had his big ol' police car right there. He could have gotten in and called for assistance.

He didn't. He chose to fire a dozen shots, hitting an unarmed suspect a half dozen or more times. And he'll never have to face a court of law to explain himself.

Notsobusy

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:33 am

southernbubby wrote:

Shouldn't police officers be trained in protocol so that needless deaths don't occur?

That's why I wrote

Quote:

On the other hand, we are not trained police officers who should be able handle such a situation.

.

Then again, because there's no way to know what really happened, there's no way to know if it was a needless death or not. Unless you think an officer should never shoot someone in self defense.

MaBelleVie

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:36 am

Barbara wrote:

Why was he approaching the officer as he surrendered? Hands up is surrender. Continuing to approach is not.

Barbara

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:37 am

glutenless wrote:

.

Then again, because there's no way to know what really happened, there's no way to know if it was a needless death or not. Unless you think an officer should never shoot someone in self defense.

Had Wilson been indicted, there would have been a trial. There hopefully would have been a competent prosecutor. And competent defense counsel. An opportunity for a jury to weigh the evidence.

Maybe there would not have been certainty. But it would have been a much more open and fair procedure.

Barbara

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:39 am

MaBelleVie wrote:

Why was he approaching the officer as he surrendered? Hands up is surrender. Continuing to approach is not.

Witnesses differed. Most said that he was approaching, but not "charging." That it was a slow walk forward, or a stumble of a couple of steps.

Notsobusy

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:39 am

Barbara wrote:

Very true.

MaBelleVie

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:43 am

Barbara wrote:

Witnesses differed. Most said that he was approaching, but not "charging." That it was a slow walk forward, or a stumble of a couple of steps.

But it isn't as simple as "he surrendered." To the officer, he was perceived to be a continued threat, not a true surrender. And witnesses agreed that he did continue to move forward.

saw50st8

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:44 am

mommy2b2c wrote:

I also believe that Michael brown was killed because he assaulted a cop and not because he was black.

I think this statement may or may not be true. I don't want to call Darren Wilson a racist (and I am not), but statistically, this is more likely to happen to a black man.

Ignoring racial issues doesn't make them go away. It just dehumanizes Michael Brown.

Barbara

Mon, Dec 01 2014, 10:52 am

MaBelleVie wrote:

But it isn't as simple as "he surrendered." To the officer, he was perceived to be a continued threat, not a true surrender. And witnesses agreed that he did continue to move forward.

If I were to speculate what Wilson thought, I would have to speculate about a police officer who told black teens that they weren't allowed to walk in the street, and who thus appears to have been at the very least mildly racist. Who claimed that one of the reasons that he suspected that the pair were involved in a robbery, and returned to them, is because the other teen was wearing a black tee shirt, although the color of the tee shirt was never in the broadcast report -- ie, its likely he suspected them because they were black (which is a whole lot nicer than saying that he committed perjury). I'd have to speculate that he was PO'ed at the confrontation in the car. And I'd have to speculate that his testimony was likely to be very much influenced by his desire not to spend the next decade or so in maximum security.